Are you learning Latin with Latin: An Intensive Course by Moreland and Fleischer? Here's where you can meet other learners using this textbook. Use this board to ask questions and post your work for feedback.

"We know that fear of the rumours going through the towns is great. O rumour-mongers, go to hell!"Is that what "go to the bad thing" might mean in our vernacular?

18. Deō scrībe carmina, cuius nūminī placent omnia pia.

My problem is the referent of "cuius". The only singular noun in the first clause is "deo", but "Write songs for the god, all of whose loyal acts please the divinity" doesn't seem to make much sense (a Roman god in covenant relationship?!). I'm stumped.

Ah! Second thoughts. Is the referent "you", the implied subject of the imperative? "Write songs to the god, you whose every pious deed pleases the divinity!" That at least makes sense.

I think it's "Do not destroy the shining altars of the gods with huge flames unless you wish to be overwhelmed by them". The more Wagnerian "Do not destroy the altars of the gods that shine with huge flames unless you wish etc." makes better sense, but would that be "Nolite aras deorum flammis ingentibus fulgentes delere, nisi ... et cetera."? I'm still very hazy about word order.

"We know that fear of the rumours going through the towns is great. O rumour-mongers, go to hell!"Is that what "go to the bad thing" might mean in our vernacular?

I think so -- L&S give "in malam rem" as something used in curses, and even have an example "abi in malam rem" = "go be hanged!" Rumoris, though, is singular.

18. Deō scrībe carmina, cuius nūminī placent omnia pia.

My problem is the referent of "cuius". The only singular noun in the first clause is "deo", but "Write songs for the god, all of whose loyal acts please the divinity" doesn't seem to make much sense (a Roman god in covenant relationship?!). I'm stumped.

Ah! Second thoughts. Is the referent "you", the implied subject of the imperative? "Write songs to the god, you whose every pious deed pleases the divinity!" That at least makes sense.

I would understand it as "cuius" going with "numini": write songs for the god, whose will/divinity is pleased by all pious things (using the passive only because of English). But I think grammatically, they're all possible -- although I would tend to take "cuius" with what comes after unless there's good reason not to, which was my reasoning here.

I think it's "Do not destroy the shining altars of the gods with huge flames unless you wish to be overwhelmed by them". The more Wagnerian "Do not destroy the altars of the gods that shine with huge flames unless you wish etc." makes better sense, but would that be "Nolite aras deorum flammis ingentibus fulgentes delere, nisi ... et cetera."? I'm still very hazy about word order.

The word order here supports either interpretation. Some word orders are more typical than others but it's not something that is fixed. In this case, I would understand it the second way -- I mean, is it only destruction by fire that's bad?

"May it not be long, citizens, for you... everything... I say... so that you may know the thoughts of this king."

Help?

EDIT: Somebody informed me that Lewis & Short say that "nē longum sit" is an expression meaning "not to be tedious". Therefore, I interpret this sentence as "Not to be tedious, citizens, I shall say everything to you so that you know the thoughts of this king". I was making the mistake of interpreting dīcam as a subjunctive instead of a future.

ēlūcet mâiōrem habēre vim ad discenda ista līberam cūriōsitātem quam meticulōsam necessitātemIt is clear that a free curiosity has a greater force in order to learn these things [languages] than a necessity based on fear. (St. Augustine, Cōnfessiōnēs I.14)